I know it's been 5 years but in line with osm.wiki/Good_practice I have a few issues with this.

1. "Unmarked Suggested Bike Route" if it's unmarked on the ground and only a suggested route according to the website you linked to, then it doesn't belong in OSM.

2. source=www.bikenorth.org.au. That map is copyright and OSM doesn't have permission to use. If this is not the case could you please point me to documentation of license/permission?

So based on this I'm starting to remove these where I've done a ground survey on Mapillary and can confirm there is no infrastructure or signposted routes.

Thanks! maxweight=* didn't explain how to tag mode specific maxweights, but looking at taginfo maxweight:mode is much more common than mode:maxweight so I've swaped it over.

Still not sure if maxweight=10 + maxweight:bus=no is the correct way to tag "10 tonne limit, busses excepted"

I've gone ahead and fixed this up in changeset/52341567 based on my survey of the area yesterday.

Only part of way/222408586 is track, the other part is path.

Even if these were tracks used by vehicles or planned as such, the current state (as originally entered into OSM and as it is today) is a path because this is what it is on the ground. It's a single file path, and looks like it has always been a single file path.

If it's decided to be turned back into a track at some stage, then it can be mapped out as a track when that happens, but right now it's not possible for a vehicle to drive through so it's a path.

OSM definition of trail/path is pretty clear. Trail if it can be traversed by a 4 wheel vehicle, if not, then path.

Please do a personal survey as it's the only way to properly obtain the information needed to map the area.

It's just frustrating that the area was mapped out via survey 4 years ago mostly correctly and then in this changeset you changed tags based on the LPI sources which made the map incorrect. I know you've done this in good faith and only trying to improve the map, but I feel ground survey should always trump LPI sources (Imagery is better than Base Map, but even the Imagery is wrong many times because of its capture date). If you find a discrepance between a surveyed feature in OSM and the LPI Base map, it's better to flag this as a note so someone can survey to re-check.

I strongly disagree with this edit.

A feature tagged as source=survey should take precedence over the LPI Base Map and where they differ the ground survey should be what is in OSM.

Take way/222408585/history as a concrete example, it was carefully mapped out via survey as highway=path (which is correct) and you've retagged it as highway=track (incorrect) based on the LPI Base Map.

OSM is not a copy of LPI Base Map, nor is the LPI Base Map always right, there are many errors in it, things that OSM had correctly until changesets like this.

I'd like you to revert any armchair edits which have overwritten things which were mapped from survey. Can you do this? Thanks.

Are you referring to the style "fitness_station:horizontal_bar=yes", I'm discussing this at osm.wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Dfitness_station#How_to_tag.2Fmap_types_of_equipment.3F and more input would be appreciated.

The problem is I read and understand the wiki article as leisure=fitness_station for the whole area which may contain multiple equipment. This is in line with 1 feature 1 OSM object.

But when tagging the whole fitness station as a node, the current documentation and examples don't make sense to me.

Not sure what happened this changeset took the oneway=yes off the Mona Vale Road Onramp/Offramp. I've fixed it up.

Building is still there as of 1 month ago https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/al9kliHbcLhGZJrx9WW4Pg so I assume you mean the building changed from an apartment hotel to regular apartments?

Hi, welcome to OSM.

Do you know the current state? Is it a construction site, or is the new building already up?

In addition to removing the old hotel, you could add either landuse=construction, or add the new building=apartments building=*

Hi, welcome to OSM.
I think it's appropriate to add office=it, see office=*.
Also the format for the phone number is described at phone=*#Usage it needs the +61 country code.

Hi, welcome to OSM.

I think it's appropriate to add office=it, see office=*.

Also the format for the phone number is described at phone=*#Usage it needs the +61 country code.

Hi, you've added the network=Sydney Transport. What does this mean? I've never heard of Sydney Transport as an entity.

"Sydney Trains is the operator of rail services across the metropolitan Sydney area, bounded by Berowra, Emu Plains, Macarthur and Waterfall." [https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sydneytrains]

NSW Trains/NSW TrainLink "NSW Trains manages the operation of NSW TrainLink, providing services between Sydney and the Hunter, Central Coast, Blue Mountains, Southern Highlands and Illawarra and South Coast regions" [https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/nswtrains] so should that be network=NSW TrainLink, operator=NSW Trains

Hi, it looks like you added sport=climbing to node/632214477. When I visited here, it looks like it only offered abseiling, not climbing, can you confirm?

osm.wiki/Tag%3Asport%3Dclimbing only describes climbing not abseiling so unless there is climbing there I don't think that's the best tag.

I've added sport=abseiling to the natural=cliff I just added.

HI, I couldn't find this track way/166821499 at all, no evidence on the ground of the track, do you think I can remove it?

Sorry you're right, thanks for that!

lanes:psv=* is only for marking out how many psv lanes exist, not where they are.

lanes=*#Lanes_reserved_for_specific_vehicles describes marking out where those psv lanes are.

I've changed this, but used taxi rather than PSV as the markings indicate taxi only.

Hi!

The way you edited has 3 lanes only the left most is psv only, the rightmost two are normal.

https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/1kH6wZEDjyV1ixlAPXtXDA

I've changed the tags over to use lanes:psv=designated|yes|yes, per lanes=*#Description but still not 100% sure that's means psv only in the left lane.

The issue is you're using OSM to save data really only useful/specific to you. As you can imagine if everyone started using OSM to tag their personal bookmarks it would clutter the database and make editing real map data more difficult.

So I'd like to see these deleted as they don't correspond to any physical feature and they are specific to your project.

There are other options apart from the OSM database to create custom maps just for yourself which you can add whatever fantasy features you like.

Hi, welcome to OSM!

In case you didn't realise you've saved your changes in the live OSM database.

In this case, the park is already mapped out so I've removed the empty way you created.

Agree with Warin61 here, a feature in OSM should represent something physically on the ground (I know this isn't always the case, but generally should apply). So if something exists, like the roundabout, map that, but if nothing exists on the ground, that's not suitable for OSM.

I'd suggest use the existing roundabouts mapped and get the center of them and use that for your purposes.

Or as Warin61 says save these features in your private layer not in OSM.

You should only use one name in the name key.

You could use the alt_name key for an alternate name.

name=*

Compare current https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/apyjQMjz2YwFit5wxfJBJA (was like that at least for the last 6 months) to historic https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/t_JhcTNCOkLpAevDZnB2JQ